Dolan v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Dolan v. State

576 So. 2d 811, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2113, 1991 WL 31814

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 12, 1991

DocketNo. 90-174

StatusPublished

This text of 576 So. 2d 811 (Dolan v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dolan v. State, 576 So. 2d 811, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2113, 1991 WL 31814 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Terrence Dolan appeals his convictions for trafficking in cocaine and resisting arrest without violence. As to defendant’s first point on appeal, we conclude that the codefendant’s testimony cannot reasonably be construed as an impermissible reference to a polygraph examination. Second, no reversible error has been shown with respect to the trial court’s ruling regarding [812]*812the two television programs which aired during the course of the trial. See Alfonso v. State, 443 So.2d 176, 177 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). The programs did not relate to the instant case, no request was made to poll the jury, and no showing was made which would raise any serious question of possible prejudice to the defendant. See id.; Robinson v. State, 438 So.2d 8 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 438 So.2d 834 (Fla. 1983); see also United States v. Goodman, 605 F.2d 870, 882 (5th Cir.1979).

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Terrence Dolan appeals his convictions for trafficking in cocaine and resisting arrest without violence. As to defendant’s first point on appeal, we conclude that the codefendant’s testimony cannot reasonably be construed as an impermissible reference to a polygraph examination. Second, no reversible error has been shown with respect to the trial court’s ruling regarding [812]*812the two television programs which aired during the course of the trial. See Alfonso v. State, 443 So.2d 176, 177 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). The programs did not relate to the instant case, no request was made to poll the jury, and no showing was made which would raise any serious question of possible prejudice to the defendant. See id.; Robinson v. State, 438 So.2d 8 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 438 So.2d 834 (Fla. 1983); see also United States v. Goodman, 605 F.2d 870, 882 (5th Cir.1979).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

576 So. 2d 811, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2113, 1991 WL 31814, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dolan-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack